Talk:Social distancing

updating / amending references

Some publishing platforms expose full publication history and peer-review, so if you follow the link to the article you get the updated version (or notice of retraction) and comments / reviews. Others, like PNAS, don't. Hence better do some search and provide external peer-reviews / commentaries if available, beside that of the article/paper. E.g. please note that ref(17) looks blatantly flawed, so worth pairing its citation with e.g. the following https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/mario-molina-coronavirus-face-masks-pnas

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.34.233.67 (talk) 16:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

What is ref-17 today could be ref-14 or ref-20 tomorrow depending on how the article is altered. 49.181.229.49 (talk) 13:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Misnomer

Calling this phenomenon "social distancing" is an unfortunate misnomer. Social distancing should mean developing social distance. What this article is about is spatial distancing. I realise that "social distancing" as a term has caught on now, but clearly the words were poorly thought out or understood when the phrase was coined and propagated. These days since English wikipedia is translated into many other languages, please do be mindful that although errors like this cause native English speakers to be non-plussed until they deduce from the context what was actually meant despite what was said, such oversights can result in even more confusing phraseology after automatic translation. 49.181.229.49 (talk) 13:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

This article is actually about physical distancing. Social distancing may be an unintended consequence of physical distancing. Bus stop (talk) 22:33, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

As much as I would love to switch to "physical distancing", I think most English sources still refer to it as "social distancing." —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:41, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

That is exactly the problem. You nailed it. Bus stop (talk) 23:10, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, I think some Chinese or Japanese sources also refer to it as 社交距離, or social distancing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:16, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

The issue has been discussed, even outside Wikipedia. However, here, article titles are basically governed by WP:NAMINGCRITERIA, most of which favor continued use of social distancing — it is the most commonly used term. —RCraig09 (talk) 16:49, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, to an extent. I mean, have you ever looked up Pigeon or Racial mixing? Those articles don't adhere to COMMONNAME in the slightest. We're all familiar with how determined the news media in general are to insist that the World wide web is the Internet (equivalent to insisting that one specific cruise ship fleet is the Pacific Ocean) yet on Wikipedia we do not sacrifice factuality in order to comply with their agenda of confusion; here we carefully maintain that the Internet and the traffic travelling over it (whether that be DNS or SSH or VPN or Halflife Deathmatch or Napster or ICQ or IRC or Usenet or email or web pages) are not to be conflated. The facts are here for anyone to understand (presented far more easily and clearly than the methods many of us have needed to learn this information from years before the advent of Wikipedia) and if news media and politicians insist on remaining confused about it all, ignorance is entirely voluntary in the information age. Here we describe things the way they are and (aware that guests visit without always knowing what things are already) we guide them to find the facts from the places they are likely to land (with redirections, disambiguations, Not to be confused with headers, See Also footers, etc.) 49.195.105.244 (talk) 01:37, 17 August 2020 (UTC)